Get Agent ROI

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds useful context about what the computation includes (breakdowns, model types) without contradicting annotations. No side effects mentioned, but not needed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences with no wasted words. Key information is front-loaded: action, output, use cases, exclusion. Very concise and structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description explains the return values in sufficient detail. The two parameters are fully documented in schema. The description is complete for a read-only analytics tool with good annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema; it only reinforces the time period implicitly via 'days' context. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool calculates ROI for an agent, lists specific outputs (costs, outcomes, multiplier, breakdown), and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool generate_roi_audit for fleet-wide ROI.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use (analysis of agent value) and when not to use (fleet-wide), with a direct alternative sibling tool named. Also implies it's for identifying which agents generate most value per dollar.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.